Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins’s Empirical Analysis
310 U.S. 381 · 1940
Citation profile
544 federal appellate · 179 district · 238 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,647 later decisions (188 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Buckley v. Valeo (1976), Shapiro v. Thompson (1969)
544 federal appellate · 179 district · 238 state decisions — followed in 31 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 7 U.S.C. § 211
Relies on United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Cromwell v. County of Sac · Nebbia v. People of State of New York · Gibbons v. Ogden · United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc.
Cited together with United States v. Rock Royal Co-Op Noyes · Ala Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States · Currin v. Wallace · Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan · Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 1,647 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is privity between officers of the same government so that a judgment in a suit between a party and a representative of the United States is res judicata in relitigation of the same issue between that party and another officer of the government.”
35 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * preserve the vitality of the Act and the utility of the language * * *,”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage““The term ‘disposal’ as used in this section includes consumption or use (whether in the production of coke or fuel, or otherwise) by a producer, and any transfer of title by the producer other than by sale. “(b) In addition to the tax imposed by subsection (a) of this section, there is hereby imposed upon the sale or other disposal of bituminous coal produced within the United States, when sold or otherwise disposed of by the producer thereof, which would be subject to the application of the conditions and provisions of the code provided for in section 4, or of the provisions of section 4-A, an excise tax in an amount equal to 19% per centum of the sale price at the mine in the case of coal disposed of by sale at the mine, or in the case of coal disposed of otherwise than by sale at the mine, and coal sold otherwise than through an arms’ length transaction, 19% per centum of the fair market value of such coal at the time of such disposal or sale. In the case of any producer who is a code member as provided in section 4 and is so certified to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue by the Commission, the sale or disposal by such producer during the continuance of his membership in the code of coal produced by him shall be exempt from the tax imposed by this subsection. “Sec. 4. The provisions of this section shall be promulgated by the Commission as the ‘Bituminous Coal Code’, and are herein referred to as the code. “Producers accepting membership in the code as provided in sect”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gray v. Powell
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.